Advertisement

Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 16, Issue 10, pp 2903–2917 | Cite as

Integrated conservation and development project life cycles in the Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal: Is development overpowering conservation?

  • Nabin BaralEmail author
  • Marc J. Stern
  • Joel T. Heinen
Original Paper

Abstract

The merits of integrated conservation and development projects (ICDPs), which aim to provide development incentives to citizens in return for conservation behaviors, have long been debated in the literature. Some of the most common critiques suggest that conservation activities tend to be strongly overpowered by development activities. We studied this assertion through participant observation and archival analysis of five Conservation Area Management Committees (CAMCs) in the Annapurna Conservation Area (ACA), Nepal. Committee activities were categorized as conservation activities (policy development and conservation implementation), development activities (infrastructure, health care, education, economic development, and sanitation), or activities related to institutional strengthening (administrative development and capacity building activities). Greater longevity of each ICDP was associated with greater conservation activity in relation to development activities. Project life cycles progressed from a focus on development activities in their early stages, through a transitional period of institutional strengthening, and toward a longer-term focus that roughly balanced conservation and development activities. Results suggest that the ICDP concept, as practiced in ACA, has been successful at building capacity for and interest in conservation amongst local communities. However, success has come over a period of nearly a decade, suggesting that prior conclusions about ICDP failures may have been based on unrealistic expectations of the time needed to influence behavioral changes in target populations.

Keywords

Annapurna Biodiversity conservation Community-based conservation Gender ICDP Nepal Protected area management 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We benefited from interacting with CAMC and VDC chairs and appreciate their time and able leadership. We would like to thank the secretaries of the CAMCs who generously made available documents necessary for this study. Members of the committees were always enthusiastic about our queries and rendered help in setting up appointments. Special thanks go to Mr. Som Ale for inspiring this project, to Mrs. Ranju Baral, who helped in translating and entering the data, and to Mr. Rupesh Shrestha, who assisted in preparing the GIS map of the study area. The first author appreciates the synergy and company of the Ghandruk office team for the duration of the fieldwork. He also wishes to thank ACAP and the King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation for providing an opportunity to serve the people of the Annapurna region.

References

  1. Adams WM, Thomas DHL (1996) Conservation and sustainable resource use in the Hadejia-Jama’are Valley, Nigeria. Oryx 30(2):131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alpert P (1996) Integrated conservation and development projects: examples from Africa. BioScience 46(11):845–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bajracharya SB, Furley PA, Netwon AC (2005) Effectiveness of community involvement in delivering conservation benefits to the Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Environ Conserv 32(2):1–9Google Scholar
  4. Baral N, Heinen JT (2006) The Maoist People’s War and conservation in Nepal. Polit Life Sci 24(1–2):2–11Google Scholar
  5. Belsky JM (1999) Misrepresenting communities: the politics of community-based rural ecotourism in Gales Point Manatee, Belize. Rural Sociol 64(4):641–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown K (2002) Innovations for conservation and development. Geogr J 168(1):6–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Budhathoki P (2004) Linking communities with conservation in developing countries: buffer zone management initiatives in Nepal. Oryx 38(3):334–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cernea M (ed) (1985) Putting people first: sociological variables in rural development. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Cohen JM, Uphoff N (1980) Participation’s place in rural development: seeking clarity through specificity. World Dev 8(3):213–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Heinen JT (1994) Emerging, diverging, and converging paradigms on sustainable development. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol 1:22–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heinen JT (1996) Human behaviour, incentives and protected area management. Conserv Biol 10(2):136–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heinen JT, Kattel B (1992) Parks, people, and conservation: a review of management issues in Nepal’s protected areas. Popul Environ 14(1):49–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Heinen JT, Low BS (1992) Human behavioural ecology and environmental conservation. Environ Conserv 19(2):105–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heinen JT, Mehta JN (1999) Conceptual and legal issues in the designation and management of conservation areas in Nepal. Environ Conserv 26(1):21–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hough JL (1991) Michiru Mountain conservation area: integrating conservation and human needs in Malawi, Central Africa. In: West PC, Berchin S (eds) Resident populations and national parks in developing nations: interdisciplinary perspectives and policy implications, University of Arizona Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  16. KMTNC (1997) Management plan for Annapurna Conservation Area Project. King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation, Kathmandu, NepalGoogle Scholar
  17. Kremen C, Raymond I, Lance K (1998) An interdisciplinary tool for monitoring conservation impacts in Madagascar. Conserv Biol 12(3):549–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McLean J, Straede S (2003) Conservation, relocation, and the paradigms of park and people management—a case study of Padampur Villages and the Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal. Soc Nat Resour 16:509–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mehta JN, Heinen JT (2001) Does community-based conservation shape favorable attitudes among locals? An empirical study from Nepal. Environ Manage 28(2):165–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. McShane TO, Wells MP (eds) (2004) Getting biodiversity projects to work: towards more effective conservation and development. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Nepal SK (2002) Linking parks and people: Nepal’s experience in resolving conflicts in parks and protected areas. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol 9:75–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Noss AJ (1997) Challenges to nature conservation with community development in central African forests. Oryx 31(3):180–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Oates JF (1995) The dangers of conservation by rural development—a case-study from the forests of Nigeria. Oryx 29(2):115–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Paul S (1987) Community participation in development projects: the World Bank experience. World Bank Discussion Paper 6. Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  25. Salmen LF (1987) Listen to the people: participant–observer evaluation of development projects. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Schelhas JW, Buck LE, Geisler C (2001) Introduction: challenge of adaptive and collaborative management. In: Buck LE, Geisler C, Schelhas JW, Wollenberg E (eds) Biological Diversity: balancing interests through adaptive collaborative management. CRC Press, New York, pp xix–xxxvGoogle Scholar
  27. Sherpa MN, Coburn B, Gurung CP (1986) Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal: operation plan. King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation, Kathmandu, NepalGoogle Scholar
  28. Spiteri A, Nepal SK (2006) Incentive-based conservation programs in developing countries: a review of some key issues and suggestions for improvements. Environ Manage 37(1):1–14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Terborgh J, van Schaik C, Davenport L, Rao M (eds) (2002) Making parks work: strategies for preserving tropical nature. Island Press, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  30. van Schaik C, Terborgh J, Davenport L, Rao M (2002) Making parks work: past present and future. In: Terborgh J, van Schaik C, Davenport L, Rao M (eds) Making parks work: strategies for preserving tropical nature. Island Press, Washington, D.C., pp 468–481Google Scholar
  31. Wainwright C, Wehrmeyer W (1998) Success in integrating conservation and development? A case study from Zambia. World Dev 26(6):933–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wells M, Brandon K, Hannah L (1992) People and parks: linking protected area management with local communities. The World Bank, Washington D.C., 99 ppGoogle Scholar
  33. Wells M (1994) A profile and interim assessment of the Annapurna Conservation Area Project, Nepal. In: Western D, Wright RM (eds) Natural connections: perspectives in community-based conservation, Island Press, Washington D.C., pp 261–281Google Scholar
  34. Wells MP, McShane TO, Dublin HT, O’Connor S, Redford KH (2004) The future of integrated conservation and development projects: building on what works. In: Wells MP, McShane TO (eds) Getting biodiversity projects to work: towards more effective conservation and development, Columbia University Press, New York, pp 397–421Google Scholar
  35. Western D (2000) Conservation in a human-dominated world. Issues in Science and Technology On-Line Spring: http://bob.nap.edu/issues/16.3/western.htm (Accessed on 11/23/(2003))Google Scholar
  36. Wright PC, Andriamihaja B (2002) Making a rain forest national park work in Madagascar: Ranomafana National Park and its long-term research commitment. In: Terborgh J, van Schaik C, Davenport L, Rao M (eds) Making parks work: strategies for preserving tropical Nature, Island Press, Washington, D.C., pp 112–136Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ForestryVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityBlacksburgUSA
  2. 2.Department of ForestryVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityBlacksburgUSA
  3. 3.Department of Environmental StudiesFlorida International UniversityMiamiUSA

Personalised recommendations